3/7/2016

Why 12 notes to the Octave?

Why 12 notes to the Octave?

Any moderately curious person will ask themselves at some point why, in western music, is the octave
divided into 12 'semi-tones'. From a mathematical point of view, we can easily explain why 12 works
nicely.
The Greeks realized that sounds which have frequencies in rational proportion are perceived as
harmonius. For example, a doubling of frequency gives an octave. A tripling of frequency gives a
perfect fifth one octave higher. They didn't know this in terms of frequencies, but in terms of lengths
of vibrating strings. Pythagoras, who experimented with a monochord, noticed that subdividing a
vibrating string into rational proportions produces consonant sounds. This translates into frequencies
when you know that the fundamental frequency of the string is inversely proportional to its length,
and that its other frequencies are just whole number multiples of the fundamental. (actually, the notion
of consonance is more complicated than rationality- see, for example, this fascinating article ).
First, we should examine what ratios are "meant" to exist in the western scale. The prominence of the
major triad in western music reflects the Greek discoveries mentioned above. Starting with the note C
as a fundamental, we get the major triad from the 3rd and 5th overtones, dropping down one and two
octaves respectively, obtaining ratios of 3/2 (G:C) and 5/4 (E:C) respectively. Two other prominent
features in western music include the V I cadence, and the I,IV,V triads. Both reflect the importance
of the 3/2 ratio, with the IV further taking into account the reciprocal of 3/2, namely 2/3 aka 4/3.
Musically, the reciprocal ratio corresponds to going down rather than up. While 3/2 corresponds to
going up a fifth, 2/3 corresponds to going down a fifth, and 4/3 corresponds to going down a fifth and
up an octave. Together, 3/2 and 4/3 divide the octave, so that going up by 3/2 followed by 4/3 gives
an octave.
The IV and V triads give us the four new notes, B and D of G,B,D, and F and A of F,A,C. Their
ratios, relative to C are 15/8 for B, 9/8 for D, 4/3 for F, and 5/3 for A. The notes formed from the I,IV,
and V major triads produce the C major scale: C D E F G A B C. Throwing in reciprocals for each of
these intervals yields all the intervals that made up western music until the rise of chromaticism.
1/1 unison
2/1 octave

C
C

3/2 perfect fifth

4/3 fourth

G
F

5/4 major third

8/5 minor 6th

E
Ab

6/5 minor 3rd

5/3 major 6th

Eb
A

9/8 major 2nd

16/9 minor 7th

D
Bb

15/8 major 7th

16/15 minor 2nd

B
C#

While this list of intervals does include a few of the most basic intervals and their reciprocals: unison,
perfect 5th, major 3rd, major 6th = 3rd above a 4th (or also a 4th above a 3rd), major 2nd = a 5th
above a 5th, and major 7th = a 3rd above a 5th (or also a 5th above a 3rd), some obvious ones are
missing (such as 7/4, 25/16 = a 3rd above a 3rd, or 9/5 = a fifth above a minor 3rd).
The tritone (such as C to F#) is also omitted from this list, an interval that did not affect the evolution
of the western scale as it was not used in western music until twelve note chromaticism had become
http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/~mrubinst/tuning/12.html

1/5

3/7/2016

Why 12 notes to the Octave?

firmly established. Actually, a tritone refers to two different possible intervals:

7/5 tritone
10/7 also called a tritone.

The idea behind twelve is to build up a collection of notes using just one ratio. The advantage to doing
so is that it allows a uniformity that makes modulating between keys possible. Without a compromise
most keys would be unusable as most of the basic intervals would not be captured in the different keys
(see the table at the end of this essay).
Unfortunately, no one ratio will do the trick exactly. However, the ratio of 3/2 happens to work
reasonably well using 12 steps. With 3/2 as the basis for the scale, none of the above ratios besides a
unison, fifth, and major 2nd are captured exactly.
However the most important constraint- namely that we get a repeating pattern going up in octaves, is
almost satisfied by this scheme. Namely, after 12 applications of the ratios 3/2, we come back very
close to where we started from (always dropping down by an octave, i.e. dividing by 2, each time the
ratio exceeds 2):
(3/2)^0 = 1
(3/2)^1 = 1.5
(3/2)^2 = 1.125
(3/2)^3 = 1.6875
(3/2)^4 = 1.2656
(3/2)^5 = 1.8984
(3/2)^6 = 1.4238
(3/2)^7 = 1.0678
(3/2)^8 = 1.6018
(3/2)^9 = 1.2013
(3/2)^10 = 1.8020
(3/2)^11 = 1.3515
(3/2)^12 = 1.0136

(after dividing by 2)
(after dividing by 2)
(after dividing by 4)
(after dividing by 4)
(after dividing by 8)
(after dividing by 16)
(after dividing by 16)
(after dividing by 32)
(after dividing by 32)
(after dividing by 64)
(after dividing by 128)

we have returned close to where we started from. (these 12 frequencies correspond to the circle of
5ths. Starting from C, we then get G D A E B F# C# Ab Eb Bb F and back to C).
The chromatic scale reflects this fact. In the 18th and 19th centuries, the chromatic scale was tuned
using the idea of 3/2. In the most elegant of these, Thomas Young's tuning, several of the fifths were
set exactly to 3/2, and the others were tempered slightly (to make octaves exact).
In the modern equal temperament (which came into practical use during the early part of the 20th
century), all fifths are tuned to 2^(7/12)=1.49651..., slightly less than 3/2, and 12 repetitions of this
ratio gets us back to where we started (after dropping down 7 octaves).
Between the two methods of incorporating 3/2, the former gives the various keys character, and I
prefer it highly. See the essay I wrote on this.
Of the various intervals, the only ones that are really well captured by tempered versions of the 3/2
scheme are: unison, 5th, major 2nd, and their reciprocals (octave, 4th, minor 7th).
Two questions: why 3/2? The choice of 3/2 says that, next to the octave, it should be regarded as the
most important interval. One can also use a major 3rd (i.e. ratio of 5/4) to build up a scale. This is
discussed towards the end of this essay.
Why do 12 steps work nicely? Interestingly, this can be explained in terms of simple number theory,
namely continued fractions.
http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/~mrubinst/tuning/12.html

2/5

3/7/2016

Why 12 notes to the Octave?

We want to understand when a power of 3/2 will be close to a power of 2:

a
(3/2)

b
=

where a and b are natural numbers

Of course, this equation can't be solved exactly using natural numbers a and b, since this would imply,
once we clear denominators, that a power of 3 was a power of 2 (an impossibility since powers of
three are odd, whereas powers of 2 are even. Such an expression would also contradict the fact that
each integer is *uniquely* expressible, up to order, as a product of primes). But, taking the ath root of
both sides:
b/a
(3/2)

we are led to look at the equation

x
(3/2)

where x is a real number

and ask for rational numbers b/a that are close to x. Taking the log of both sides, and solving for x we
find that x = log(3/2)/log(2) = .584962500721... To find good rational approximations to this number
we should turn to the so-called continued fraction of x. Any real number can be written as a continued
fraction, which is a crazy looking fraction that, unless the original number happens to be rational, goes
on forever. In our case, the first few terms of the continued fraction looks like this
log(3/2)/log(2) =

1
-------------------------------------------1
1 + ---------------------------------------1
1 + -----------------------------------1
2 + -------------------------------1
2 + ---------------------------1
3 + -----------------------1
1 + -------------------1
5 + ---------------1
2 + -----------1
23 + ------2 + ...

(the expansion has 1's in the numerators and continues forever).

Taking the first few terms leads to the following sequence of rational approximations to
log(3/2)/log(2) = .584962500721...:
1
----------1
1 + ------1
http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/~mrubinst/tuning/12.html

1/2

3/5

3/7/2016

Why 12 notes to the Octave?

1
--------------1
1 + ----------1
1 + ------2

1
------------------1
1 + --------------1
1 + ----------1
2 + ------2
1
----------------------1
1 + ------------------1
1 + --------------1
2 + ----------1
2 + ------3

3/5

7/12

24
-41

etc

It is the approximation 7/12 = .5833333333... which suggests an octave of 12 steps, with a fifth equal
to 7 semi-tones.
Why have we looked at continued fractions: it turns out that they give the best rational approximations
to numbers, i.e. any closer approximation must have a larger denominator.
If one, similarly, forms the continued fraction for log(5/4)/log(2)=.32192809..., one finds the
following list of approximating fractions: 1/3, 9/28, 19/59, 47/146, etc. This suggests, for example,
that a 28 note scale would work nicely using the major 3rd as the basis for its construction.
On the other hand, we need not always work with the best. For example, 11/19 = .5789... is
reasonably close to log(3/2)/log(2) = .5849..., and 6/19 = .3157... is reasonably close to
log(5/4)/log(2)=.3219.... This suggests that a 19 note scale with a major 3rd being 6 'semi-tones' and a
perfect 5th being 11 'semi-tones' might work nicely. In fact, 19 appears in the denominators of rational
approximations of the continued fractions for log(5/3)/log(2), and log(6/5)/log(2). This says that 19
would also work well for capturing the reciprocal pair of ratios 5/3 and 6/5.
If we use an equal tempered 19 note scale, we get the following list of ratios
k
--0
1
2
3

k/19
2
--------------------1
1.0371550444461919861
1.0756905862201824742
1.1156579177615436668

http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/~mrubinst/tuning/12.html

nearby ratio
----------------------------------unison *
28/27
14/13 close to 16/15 minor 2nd *
10/9 close to major 2nd (9/8) *
4/5

3/7/2016

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

Why 12 notes to the Octave?

1.1571102372827198253
1.2001027195781030358
1.2446925894640233315
1.2909391979474049134
1.3389041012244721773
1.3886511426146561750
1.4402465375387590116
1.4937589616544857174
1.5492596422666557249
1.6068224531337648149
1.6665240127970890861
1.7284437865632111533
1.7926641922757116385
1.8592707100168125609
1.9283519958849901632
2

7/6 also close to 8/7

minor 3rd (6/5) (see how well this one fits) *
major 3rd (5/4) *
9/7
major 3rd (4/3) *
tritone (7/5) *
tritone (10/7) *
5th (3/2) *
14/9
minor 6th (8/5) *
major 6th (5/3) (see how well this one fits) *
12/7 also close to 7/4
9/5 close to minor 7th (16/9) *
13/7 close to major 7th (15/8) *
27/14
octave *

*'s indicate notes that have a corresponding spot (more or less)

in the 12 note octave.

I'm not sure if this scale has been used extensively by anyone, though it seems to be an interesting
alternative to the 12 step chromatic scale. Conceivably, a nice well-tempered version could be
devised. There are some 19 tone pieces at a certain web site Look at Joseph Pehrson, and Neil
Haverstick who use various 19 tone tunings.
I found a link that talks about the history of 19 tone tunings.
The following table depicts in cents (percentage of a semitone), how poorly a justly intoned piano
tuned in the key of C would do in capturing the various intervals in the various keys. This is
compared, in the last column, against equal temperament. For example, the table says, that in the key
of A, a major third would be off by 41% of a semitone. Notice in the last column, that, while equal
temperament captures the intervals 3/2, 9/8, 4/3, and 16/9 quite well, the other intervals are all off by
more than 11% of a semitone.

F#

C#

Ab

Eb

Bb

E.T.

1
16/15
9/8
6/5
5/4
4/3
7/5
3/2
8/5
5/3
16/9
15/8

0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

0.00
0.00
-21.51
-21.51
0.00
0.00
27.26
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-7.71

0.00
0.00
-21.51
-21.51
-7.71
0.00
27.26
-21.51
-21.51
0.00
0.00
19.55

0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
41.06
21.51
48.77
0.00
0.00
13.79
21.51
41.06

0.00
0.00
-7.71
0.00
41.06
0.00
27.26
0.00
0.00
41.06
21.51
41.06

0.00
0.00
19.55
0.00
41.06
0.00
27.26
-7.71
0.00
41.06
0.00
19.55

0.00
7.71
27.26
-13.79
27.26
7.71
34.98
27.26
7.71
48.77
7.71
27.26

0.00
-19.55
0.00
-41.06
0.00
-27.26
7.71
0.00
-41.06
0.00
-19.55
0.00

0.00
-41.06
-21.51
-41.06
0.00
0.00
7.71
0.00
-41.06
0.00
-27.26
0.00

0.00
-41.06
-21.51
-48.77
0.00
0.00
-13.79
-21.51
-41.06
0.00
0.00
0.00

0.00
-19.55
0.00
0.00
21.51
21.51
7.71
0.00
-27.26
21.51
21.51
0.00

0.00
-27.26
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
7.71
0.00
0.00
21.51
21.51
0.00

0.00
-11.73
-3.91
-15.64
13.69
1.96
17.49
-1.95
-13.69
15.64
3.91
11.73

Copyright Michael Rubinstein 2000.

Home

http://www.math.uwaterloo.ca/~mrubinst/tuning/12.html

5/5